Abstract

Tthis study aimed to analyze the validity of debt recognition letters and selling authorities (evidence P-2 and evidence P-3), the basis for judges’ considerations, and the legal consequences of the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 for debtors and creditors. The method used in this study was normative juridical research with a statutory approach and a case approach. The results of the systematic interpretive analysis showed that the debt recognition letter (evidence P-2) and selling authorities (evidence P-3) in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 could be declared invalid. Juridically, the judges’ considerations were considered insufficient in examining the truth of the events in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/2012. The legal consequences that occurred after the verdict, the creditor could have collateral for the land-based on an invalid debt acknowledgment but legalized by the panel of judges in the decision. The legal consequence for the debtor, the legal action to defend the land that was carried out by him was considered an act against the law

Highlights

  • this study aimed to analyze the validity of debt recognition letters

  • The method used in this study was normative juridical research

  • The results of the systematic interpretive analysis showed that the debt recognition letter

Read more

Summary

INFO ARTIKEL

Abstract: this study aimed to analyze the validity of debt recognition letters and selling authorities (evidence P-2 and evidence P-3), the basis for judges’ considerations, and the legal consequences of the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 for debtors and creditors. The results of the systematic interpretive analysis showed that the debt recognition letter (evidence P-2) and selling authorities (evidence P-3) in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 could be declared invalid. Abstrak: kajian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis keabsahan surat pengakuan utang dan kuasa menjual (bukti P-2 dan bukti P-3), dasar pertimbangan hakim, dan akibat hukum Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2290 K/Pdt/2012 bagi debitur dan kreditur. Hasil analisis secara interpretatif sistematis menunjukkan bahwa Surat pengakuan utang (bukti P-2 ) dan surat kuasa menjual (bukti P-3) dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2290 K/Pdt/2012 dapat dinyatakan tidak absah.

PENDAHULUAN Kajian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh adanya
HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call